Comparison Overview

Prisma Health

VS

Beth Israel Lahey Health

Prisma Health

300 E McBee Ave, None, Greenville, South Carolina, US, 29601
Last Update: 2025-11-27

Prisma Health is the largest not-for-profit health organization in South Carolina, serving more than 1.2 million patients annually. Our facilities in the Greenville and Columbia surrounding markets are dedicated to improving the health of all South Carolinians through improved clinical quality, access to care and patient experience, while also addressing the rising cost of health care. Our Purpose: Inspire health. Serve with compassion. Be the difference.

NAICS: 62
NAICS Definition: Health Care and Social Assistance
Employees: 12,865
Subsidiaries: 1
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1

Beth Israel Lahey Health

None
Last Update: 2025-11-20
Between 750 and 799

Beth Israel Lahey Health is a new, integrated system providing patients with better care wherever they are. Care informed by world-class research and education. We are doctors and nurses, technicians and social workers, innovators and educators, and so many others. All with a shared vision for what health care can and should be.

NAICS: 62
NAICS Definition: Health Care and Social Assistance
Employees: 28,316
Subsidiaries: 13
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
2

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/prisma-health.jpeg
Prisma Health
ISO 27001
ISO 27001 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
SOC2 Type 1 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
SOC2 Type 2 certification not verified
Not verified
GDPR
GDPR certification not verified
Not verified
PCI DSS
PCI DSS certification not verified
Not verified
HIPAA
HIPAA certification not verified
Not verified
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/beth-israel-lahey-health.jpeg
Beth Israel Lahey Health
ISO 27001
ISO 27001 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
SOC2 Type 1 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
SOC2 Type 2 certification not verified
Not verified
GDPR
GDPR certification not verified
Not verified
PCI DSS
PCI DSS certification not verified
Not verified
HIPAA
HIPAA certification not verified
Not verified
Compliance Summary
Prisma Health
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Beth Israel Lahey Health
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Hospitals and Health Care Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Prisma Health in 2025.

Incidents vs Hospitals and Health Care Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Beth Israel Lahey Health in 2025.

Incident History — Prisma Health (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Prisma Health cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Beth Israel Lahey Health (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Beth Israel Lahey Health cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/prisma-health.jpeg
Prisma Health
Incidents

Date Detected: 10/2019
Type:Data Leak
Attack Vector: Stolen Credentials
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/beth-israel-lahey-health.jpeg
Beth Israel Lahey Health
Incidents

Date Detected: 12/2023
Type:Cyber Attack
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 12/2023
Type:Cyber Attack
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 07/2014
Type:Data Leak
Attack Vector: Physical Theft
Blog: Blog

FAQ

Beth Israel Lahey Health company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Prisma Health company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Beth Israel Lahey Health company has faced a higher number of disclosed cyber incidents historically compared to Prisma Health company.

In the current year, Beth Israel Lahey Health company and Prisma Health company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Beth Israel Lahey Health company nor Prisma Health company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Beth Israel Lahey Health company nor Prisma Health company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Beth Israel Lahey Health company has reported targeted cyberattacks, while Prisma Health company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Prisma Health company nor Beth Israel Lahey Health company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Prisma Health nor Beth Israel Lahey Health holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Beth Israel Lahey Health company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Prisma Health company.

Beth Israel Lahey Health company employs more people globally than Prisma Health company, reflecting its scale as a Hospitals and Health Care.

Neither Prisma Health nor Beth Israel Lahey Health holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Prisma Health nor Beth Israel Lahey Health holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Prisma Health nor Beth Israel Lahey Health holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Prisma Health nor Beth Israel Lahey Health holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Prisma Health nor Beth Israel Lahey Health holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Prisma Health nor Beth Israel Lahey Health holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Angular is a development platform for building mobile and desktop web applications using TypeScript/JavaScript and other languages. Prior to versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1, there is a XSRF token leakage via protocol-relative URLs in angular HTTP clients. The vulnerability is a Credential Leak by App Logic that leads to the unauthorized disclosure of the Cross-Site Request Forgery (XSRF) token to an attacker-controlled domain. Angular's HttpClient has a built-in XSRF protection mechanism that works by checking if a request URL starts with a protocol (http:// or https://) to determine if it is cross-origin. If the URL starts with protocol-relative URL (//), it is incorrectly treated as a same-origin request, and the XSRF token is automatically added to the X-XSRF-TOKEN header. This issue has been patched in versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1. A workaround for this issue involves avoiding using protocol-relative URLs (URLs starting with //) in HttpClient requests. All backend communication URLs should be hardcoded as relative paths (starting with a single /) or fully qualified, trusted absolute URLs.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 7.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:H/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X
Description

Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Uncontrolled Recursion vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft deep ASN.1 structures that trigger unbounded recursive parsing. This leads to a Denial-of-Service (DoS) via stack exhaustion when parsing untrusted DER inputs. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 8.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X
Description

Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Integer Overflow vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft ASN.1 structures containing OIDs with oversized arcs. These arcs may be decoded as smaller, trusted OIDs due to 32-bit bitwise truncation, enabling the bypass of downstream OID-based security decisions. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 6.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X
Description

Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. Prior to versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2, working with large buffers in Lua scripts can lead to a stack overflow. Users of Lua rules and output scripts may be affected when working with large buffers. This includes a rule passing a large buffer to a Lua script. This issue has been patched in versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2. A workaround for this issue involves disabling Lua rules and output scripts, or making sure limits, such as stream.depth.reassembly and HTTP response body limits (response-body-limit), are set to less than half the stack size.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Description

Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. In versions from 8.0.0 to before 8.0.2, a NULL dereference can occur when the entropy keyword is used in conjunction with base64_data. This issue has been patched in version 8.0.2. A workaround involves disabling rules that use entropy in conjunction with base64_data.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H